This month’s RPG Bloggers carnival is themed on D&D. The guest article below by Mike E. has some great ideas for modifying your D&D experience by borrowing what he likes from one edition and adding it to another.

I’d like to think I’m a fairly good DM. I know I have my strengths, and I have my weaknesses. I’m always looking to improve my DMing skills. I’m also always looking for ways to improve the game I love the most: Dungeons and Dragons.

Following are things I’ve either done, or am trying, that work for me. I figured I’d jot them down for other people to see. Maybe people will like them. Maybe they won’t. I like sharing ideas, because with feedback comes new and better ideas. Hopefully someone out there will like at least one thing I’ve done and try it in their campaign.

Oh, and I don’t claim that any of this is new or novel, ’cause I’m sure it’s all been done before.

Thanks for reading.

D&D 4E rules mentioned in this article

Bloodied: when your hit points drop to half their maximum. When bloodied, PCs and monsters often have access to different powers, abilities, and options.

Healing surge: PCs receive a certain number of these each day and can use them to regain 25% of their hit points. This conceptual mechanic represents second wind, rallying, and swings in momentum during combat.

Status effects: special states or rules applied to PCs and their foes to represent different conditions, such as poisoned, diseased, or bleeding.

Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition rules

I purchased the core 4e books and the PHB 2 because I wanted to judge for myself on 4e instead of just listening to other people’s opinions. I read through all the books till my eyes bled and found that many of the mechanics I really like, but the classes and the lack of customization I really don’t. I also don’t like that many of the powers are just variations on a theme. So, reading through, I looked at what made 4e more fun and easy, and decided what I wanted to keep.

Character initiative going up every even level. This makes sense to me. Adventurers of level 12 still going at their original +2 (because they don’t have a great Dex or improved initiative) seems non-epic to me.

I’ve kept healing surges to lighten the load on the healers, but they only get 2 + CON Mod (min of +1) healing surges per day.

Bloodied. I’ve kept bloodied, but when bloodied characters take -2 to all rolls, showing they are becoming fatigued.

One thing that annoyed me with D&D 3.x is status effects. They are difficult to track. In 4e, status effects go on during the whole encounter, but at the end of your turn, you get a save. I’m keeping that, but using 3.5 saving throws.

Powers. At level 1 the players can choose two powers: encounter, daily, or utility. Both can be used once per day. As they level up they can swap out powers for something else. Also, if they really like a low level power, we buff it up to match their level.

I’m using 4e races, racial abilities, and racial powers and seeing how that works in 3.x.

Quick Draw feat gives an additional +2 to Initiative. I like this.

How do you update monsters from 3.x to reflect the initiative boost? Look at their challenge rating or level advancement, and + that to create their new bonus to initiative. If they have a rapid strike or quick draw feat, give ‘em +2 initiative.

Monster Mods

One of the things that always got to me about many role-playing games is the length of combat. Something many GMs and players have struggled with. To me, combat should be fast, furious, and deadly without the really striving for TPK.

I decided to create a style of ‘minion’ or ‘mook,’ for lack of a better term. They don’t have 1 hit point, but can definitely be killed in 1 to 2 hits. To make them more of a threat, I give them a higher initiative, higher attack, and up their damage and saves. So, if the creature has an axe that normally does 1d8 damage, I up it to 2d8 or 3d8.

The next style of enemy has slightly higher HP and doesn’t do as much damage, but has some tricks up their sleeves that make them just as nasty, but again, they can go down in 2-4 hits.

Then it goes to mini-boss and boss type creatures. These can be anything; a goblin king to a shambling mound to a chaos beast to a lich. I look at what the Monster Manual says their abilities, stats, etc., are and use those as a base, and increase or lower damage stats and etc. Usually I do this on the fly and have become good at providing a challenge for my players.

Fencing

I’ve heard that Nobis is coming out in July and has mechanics for fencing, and I’m excited to see what they have come up with and may take that over what I’ve done. One thing I see players rarely take use of is blocking, parrying, and dodging. Why? Because combat is a war of hit point attrition, and the one who loses hit points faster loses.

With 3.x mechanics, you have to use your attack (sometimes full action) to block or parry an attack. Then there is a complex set of rules that allows you to oppose roll, roll again, then roll again (I’m exaggerating) and you may get a hit off on the target for doing this.

What I’ve come up with (and am currently playtesting this) is fencing points. You get your level in fencing points and they refresh every level. Fencing points can be used to dodge, or block attacks. You can block 1 attack by target once per round by burning points.

If you have 4 guys making one attack each on you, you can burn 4 points in an attempt to block. If you have three guys making 2 attacks each you can only burn three points and block one attack of each enemy. To block or dodge you roll a DEX (the modifier) or Athletics/Tumble check (whichever is higher) and dodge the attack and shift one square away. The DC is their attack roll. For blocking, you roll an opposing attack roll. If you beat them, you successfully block their attack. The next part has more on fencing options in the Eberron rules.

Eberron Rules

I like Eberron’s rules for Action Points (AP). You get 3+ your level and they add +#d6 (depending on level) to your attack, save, skill check, ability check rolls when you decided to use one. They come in handy, and allow the players to be exceptional. I give everyone the Action Surge Feat, which allows the player to burn three action points to take an extra move or attack action (basically what burning 1 AP in 4e does). In regards to fencing it also allows bonuses. If you successfully block an attack, even if it is not your turn you can burn three AP and make a free attack. If you successfully dodge an attack, you can spend 3 AP and make a move action. These actions are limited because it is NOT your players turn, but allow you to do something extra.

Pathfinder

I’m also using rules and changes from Pathfinder Beta, and when the published book goes live, I’ll assimilate what I like from that and what I like from the beta. Pathfinder has quite a few changes to feats, combat, etc. that I like.

Alright. So that’s it. My little bit of knowledge. Whether you like it or not, I just wanted to put it out there for others to criticize or take ideas from or whatever.

17 Responses to “My House Rules for D&D”

As general advice, I’d say that, if you haven’t played the game “as written,” do so. Then make house-rules. I think if you’re going with 4e, play it as it is. If, in the course of that session, the things that looked change-worthy on paper were in play, make the change. I’m not a defender of 4e, or of D&D — hell, I greatly dislike the game. However, as a general approach to rules alterations, my advice is to play then change, not vice-versa.

For instance, your Healing Surges house-rule looks good… on paper. However, in game, I think you’ll have a lot of cursing players (especially Leaders who are trying to do what they’re designed to). Having played and seeing where you’re going with it, 5+Con would work better and give the kind of balance you might be looking for. A Paladin, for instance, with a Con of 13, would have 3 healing surges. That means that if he uses a Lay-on-Hands, there’s one of his own gone. If a Cleric or Warlord uses Healing/Inspiring Word, there goes another. If he uses a Second Wind, the third’s gone. That can easily happen in a single encounter. Bam. He’s done. 15-minute adventuring day. Time for an extended rest. :)

The -2 to hit when bloodied might be problematic as well. Seems like 4e characters have a tough time hitting anyway, and combats can get drawn out. Anything that makes this worse will likely slow the game and/or make it more fatal. Of course, that may have been your intent.

I like the attitude – take what you need for your campaign and forget the rest. It’s not entirely clear the first time you read the article that what you have done is a hybrid between 3.x and 4.0, so I thought I’d point that out for anyone that missed it. Rafe and Arnakeith seem to be assessing the hybrid rules from a purely 4e perspective.

I especially like the fencing rules you offer, and from what I’ve seen of the Novus rules on fencing (which I still havn’t had time to investigate fully), your two techniques would seem to be complimentary.

One thing I’m not quite clear on: was this an existing 3.x campaign that you’ve updated to incorporate some 4e game mechanics, or is it a new campaign?

Hey guys! Thanks for the feedback on the article. @ Anarkeith and Rafe, thanks for being constructive as opposed to vindictive:) I really do appreciate that!

@ Mike- This is a game that we started about a year ago that was just straight up 3.5 with a few things I had house ruled (mostly at that point the monster description that I mentioned in this article, but it has been more fine tuned since). Since the campaign has started I have been looking for ways to make things more to my liking with house rules and doing hybrid changes. As you stated this is taking things I liked from 4e and adding them to my 3.5 game. So there are no roles in my game as defined by 4e.

As for the healing surges, the reason I added those was to take some of the burded off the healers. I know that is what their “role” is in the game, but at the same time, I hate watching players come up with really cool ideas for a spell, combat, etc, to have to put it on hold because someone is in desparate need of healing. I also didn’t want to flood the players with potions, since that seems counter productive. The use of the healing surge is so the healer can be something other than a healing pez dispenser for a round or two, and then do what he/she needs to do for the party as a whole.

The fencing system, and I admit could use some fine tuning, so by all means pass me ideas here or on my blog, has been working fine thus far with the dodging and blocking attacks. My players like it and they really enjoy being able to do more outside of their turn. It adds a new level of involvement and planning, so I’m happy with it thus far. I will fine tune it as time goes on.

The -2 to rolls when bloodied is a nice touch, though I suggest also giving them the same -2 to AC. I have implemented a similar houserule in the campaign I am doing now, where the characters take penalties to all of their rolls, even damage, and their AC as they get injured (76%+ health = no mods, 51%-75% = -1, 26%-50% = -2, and 0-25% = -3). At first I did not include the AC modifier, so as combat wore on and both sides were fairly wounded no one seemed able to hit anymore… So yeah, add a -2 AC modifier as well to represent them not being able to react to blows as quickly as they used to. And be sure all (most…) NPC’s and monsters are also affected by this and it balances out nicely, almost like AC and Attack modifiers based on size. Another thing you can do is add feats that reduce or eliminate this modifier, to help the fighter types out a bit.

I’m of the mind that if you’re going to play 4e, play 4e. It’s fine to make a couple tweaks here and there, but why mess with the math, research, and playtesting done by the people who designed the system?

I think that the point is that he is playing 3.5 with a “couple of tweaks” that he’s lifted from 4th ed.

As for the reasons to change the rules, they all generally boil down to one: the objectives, parameters, and restrictions placed apon those designers may not match the objectives, paramaters, and restrictions of your campaign. The rules may be official, but they are not Holy Writ.

@ Robert
I’m liking the -2 penalty on attack rolls and to AC when Bloodied. I’m definitely going to use that one. Good sound logic there, but if your penalizing them (PCs and monsters alike) on AC because they can’t react to attacks as well, then shouldn’t you impose the same penalty to Reflex defense as well? Perhaps that is just heaping on too much, but I think the logic is still sound.

As far as I’m concerned, the fencing system idea is brilliant. Sure, there are some improvements that will eventually suggest themselves, but having such a thing to begin with removes cumbersome and unworkable arrangements for swashbuckling characters and city settings, and that’s a fine thing.

I got to play test the Fencing Points system a little more this past Sunday, and I really like the way that it is working. Players are more willing to try stunts and actions, such as dodging, parrying, blocking, and swashbuckling when they know it isn’t going to cost them their standard/movement action.

Next session has quite a bit more combat in it than last, so hopefully my players will have more time to use it and try it out with greater success!

I dunno about the level of change representing a different game system, I don’t think they go far enough for that. Maybe sometime I should do a post on just how much you have to change a game before you consider it a new system…

Like the rest of the gang, the bloodied rule is excellent. I think it also gives good motivation for someone to use the opportunity to block, parry or dodge as they will prevent loss of hp that will bring them to that point.
I am not a fan of action points personally as it seems one more thing to keep track of. I am tossing around the idea of using the plus that comes from your dex as the amount of points you could use per encounter using your system. Easy to keep track of.

No matter where you get them from, it’s still one more thing to keep track of. Just about any mnemonic device used as a reminder of the total won’t discriminate between sources. Personally, I like the notion of having a number of action points equal to the number of 1000 xp needed to obtain your current class level, to use in ALL combats that take place in the course of that level, forcing the character to pick and choose whether or not to use them. You could add the character’s dex mod to that, if you really wanted to, or perhaps the dex mod could represent the total number that could be used in any one combat.

Another idea would be to set the number as 1 for every ten hp the character has, but this discriminates against non-fighters. On the other hand, non-fighters are less likely to need to use them, so perhaps offering an xp bonus for unused action points would balance the books? No, because a fighter is more likely to have action points left over simply because they start with more of them.

It’s easy to come up with things that, if kept track of, would add to the realism or excitement of combat. But each one comes with a bookkeeping cost, and that cost usually subtracts from the player’s ability to immerse themselves in the combat – subtracting from the realism and excitement of the battle. I’ve yet to be convinced that there’s anything much beyond hit points that’s worth the cost; each time I’ve thought I’ve found something, testing has proved me wrong.

4th Edition has a lot of flaws, but you really need to play it a great deal before house ruling it. Healing surges don’t “take a load off healers”, they are the primary mechanism healers use to heal. The system itself is fundamentally flawed, but reducing the surges won’t help, unless you also remove the surge cost from at-will healing abilities like healing word. (Which might actually be a good change.)

I also like the idea of minions with a bit more than 1 hit point, just so that little incidental things like a Rod of Reaving can’t just decimate entire armies of mooks.

I’d have to play around with the idea for bloodied to see if it is fun at all. I have the suspicion it would just be kind of annoying. Also, you should think about how dragonborn would interact with that rule. Maybe dropping their speed by -2 would make more sense, since anything that adjusts +to hit in 4th edition has a massive impact on gameplay. You don’t want to be fighting a boss that needs 14+s to hit, and suddenly need 16+s. That’s simply not fun.

Bill, your comments seem to flow from the same false premise that has tripped up a number of the other commentators – he isn’t “house ruling” 4th ed, he’s “house ruling” D&D 3.5 using 4th ed as a source for ideas. I dunno, maybe we didn’t made that as clear as it should be in the post.

That means that giving all characters “healing surges” does take a load off healers, because characters are better able to heal themselves.

Similarly, your appraisal of the “bloodied” rule doesn’t stand up in full because there aren’t “dragonborn” in 3.x to worry about – and there are heaps of things that already adjust + to hit, everything from position on the battlefield to magic weapons to feats to what class you are.

Nevertheless, your comments regarding potential pitfalls in these house rules are welcome here and worth bearing in mind should anyone be minded to try these for themselves.

I use 3.5 system as a DM, with the PRRPG rules system, but also as you did, I put some house rules to bring some good ideas of 4th edition. A better idea for increasing initiative by level but more “realistic” is to use the REFLEX BONUS instead only of the DEX bonus,
But also put the ACP in as a way to penalize REFLEX, the used of heavy armor in combat instead of light armor. It works well. And for converting the monsters, use the REFLEX Modifier. I also put in the Reflex Modifier the Size modifiers, so a Halfling has more reflex due to her size, than a large one…. So this also would afectts initiative.